really the students out and further privatization of the school. another issue was a video done of this incident at the school. there was a video done of the physical abuse of the student at the school and apparently amos brown was able to see that video. who allowed him to see that video, since he is not a parent of the student? is this allowed? other people have asked to see the have and not been provided that opportunity. there are serious and systematic problems going on and it has to be addressed. if this is slander, it's absolutely untrue and i think the superintendent should apologize to the people, the parents and students at mlk. thank you. >> good evening everyone. my name was in the paper for -- i will just quote it, "she yelled at me in front of two

classes of students," said linda cook a former english teacher who was removed from her job and i will use another [kwo-ets/] [tpra-erlt/], "there are procedures in place to evaluate personnel and we follow these procedures," said school superintendent richard carranza in a statement. slandser is when someone tells a lie about another. it is slander when the lie can damage another's reputation. a group of students wrote a letter about the principal's behavior when she came to the classroom and i will read a short portion of this to you guys. "i don't have time for this," in a rude way and in a very offensive way that upset the entire class and just walked out and slammed the door. this is your principal, slamming doors in the front of

students. miss cooks was very hurt that she didn't say a thing and just packed her stuff and called miss nancy and asked for a sub for her class so she could leave we are shocked that our principal would act like that, especially in front of the whole class and we felt very, very sad and mad that our teacher left. we are not forced to write this letter. we wrote this because we love and care about miss cooks. this is from a group of students who wrote this. and you know -- you all know that there is a problem at mlk. why don't you do something? the naacp is there, why don't you pay a security guard instead of the naacp? what amount of money are they getting? that is not the purpose of the naacp and amos brown. why don't you do something?

like i said before, why don't you do the right thing over this christmas holiday? remember jesus is the reason for the season and think about how you want your children? that is all you have to do -- how would you like it to your daughter or son came home and say the principal sat on me today? i wouldn't like it very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> that is your two minutes. >> yes, my name is karen and

i work with severely impaired children. i would like everybody here to please take out a piece of paper and a pencil. and please write this down. go to the website tonight when you get home or tomorrow of the united public workers for action. their website is www.upwa.org. the reason i'm here is because i went to that website today, and i saw an incredible narrative about mlk junior middle school. i saw two press rallies where people who were employees of the school district, members of uesf and because of the incident at mlk back in february where the principal

sat on the student and as a result of that, as a result of that event, 17 people were fired or dismissed or reorganized from counselor into social worker. right? now i want to know how the board, how you mr. carranza can put out a memo and say there was a complete investigation, when you didn't even interview the people would were involved? maybe you would get up and respond to me. i would really like that as a matter of fact. and i also would like to know how tobey, the great security guard who has worked for the district for 40 years and loves the kids. he really does. how the police report that was put in for him, that he did not sign said that a student attacked him, when tobey himself says that the principal fell on him. and she is not a light woman.

>> thank you. >> thank you very much for your comments. mr. carranza, did you want to say anything? >> sure. thank you, president yee, and absolutely unequivocal that we take student safety -- in particular the no. 8, the no. 3, and the no. 38. you see the no. 8 represents the number of latino students

proficient before the current principal took over at mlk. 8% were proficient in english language, and math. 3% or proficient in terms of african-american students before this principal took over. 3%. and if that is not enough, let's talk about 17 and 33. 33% of the latino students being proficient in language arts and 17% proficient in math. how can we as adults in this community who have our high school diplomas and some cases have your bachelors degrees and master degrees and doctorates who have shown proficiency and gone to college, sit and purport to be for the kids when you have 3% of the african-american students proficient?

how can we say that and not once have i heard what are you going do about that? we're going to do something about that and that is with a our strategic plan is about and you are with us or not and we welcome and join arms with the naacp, who have said, by the way, they are getting not one dime. not one penny and going out and raising their own funding to support our students at mlk and in the spirit of martin luther king jr., who went to jail because he wanted a better future, we're going to do whatever it takes to ensure that our kids have a better future at mlk. but as you think about this, i want you to think about 8, 3, 33, and 17. and when we start talking about those numbers being 100%, then we're talking about what the

real work is about. [ applause ] >> so we're going to move on to -- >> president yee? superintendent, i am from martin luther king. >> i'm sorry, do you have a speaker card? >> i don't have a speaker card. >> i'm sorry. >> i am asking if i could say a few words, please? >> no. you don't have a speaker card. >> i just wanted to thank superintendent carranza for taking a stand and for those watching online, letting them know the reality of what is really going on. if he is bold enough to take a stand, i hope and a pray that everyone here in this room, on this board, all educators, parents, security, secretaries, whoever they may be, who are in

charge of our children when they are not in our care, and they are at the school site that we have the utmost compassion and respect for our children. so i just wanted to say thank you because all of you know on this board know how many times that have i come forward and asked for help, but what i have gotten in return is removal. i would like for you to reach out to me, because i know what works in the bayview and in the southeast. i know the families and the communities in the bayview. i know the church leaders in the bayview and in the southeast sector of the city. i know that we need to close the achievement gap of the targeted population, which is the african-american, the latinos, the polynesians, and our chinese-american children, because we are having all of these problems at our school

sites our chinese-american children have come to me and told me that they will not do well in the c s.a.t. and they are struggling and that should not be. thank you for allowing me this time president yee, thank you. >> thank you. advisory committee reports, appointments by board members? seeing none, item l. special order of business. i now call the public hearing and approval of the state testing apportionment waiver. is there a motion and second? >> i move. >> second. >> reading of recommendation by commissioner designee. mr. burke? >> superintendent,

commissioners, my name is john burke, i'm the supervisor for the assessments office. requested action that the board of supervisors -- the board of education of the san francisco unified school district will hold a public hearing regarding the submission of a generwaiver request to the california department of education and support said waiver under the general waiver authority of education code 330 50-33053, the california code of regulations section to be waived. celdt ccr 1517-5b1a which requires that the california english language development test, california english language development test committee on higher education

aparking lotionment request be sent to the california department of education postmarked no later than december 31 2012. a request for 88,790,000 dollars from the state, which if we submit this waiver we'll be able to receive. >> so i don't have any public comment cards for this. any comments from the board members. seeing none roll call. >> thank you, miss ly? >> yes. miss wong? >> yes. >> miss fewer? >> yes. >> miss maufas? >> yes. >> miss mendoza? >> aye. >> dr. maufas? murase. >> aye? >> miss wynns? >> aye. >> mr. yee? >> aye >> seven ayes. >> thank you.

the second special order of business would be the recommendation that the board of education of the san francisco unified school district review and adopt the developer impact fee amount and five-year reports for the five year ending june 30, 2012. is there a motion and second? >> so moved. >> second. >> reading by commission designee. >> good evening, commissioners, it's that time for the most exciting report that you will hear. i thought i had the monoply until i heard the last item identified and i figured there was some competition for this report. there has been a lot of great news tonight, i guess in a funny sort of way buried in

this rather droll report. for those of you who may remember that there were a couple of sections in the government code that require every school district in california, every year to provide the following information on what is called "developer impact fees," which are essentially the fees that a school district collects from developers that build within our cities and our counties, depending on whether it's a commercial or residential project and to report every year how much money we collected and how much interest we earned and what we spent the money with and to make sure that money was spent appropriately. and so also provide a certain projection of five years down the road, what we intend to spend the money on? and that is a requirement of the government code and so every year we hire a consultant to do

an outside audit of our fees and provide the report. and so the requested action, i would ask of the board tonight is that the board of education of the san francisco unified school district review and adopt the developer impact fee annual and five-year reports for the fiscal year ending june 30, 2012. the attached report dated november 21,2012 rity relates to the collection and expenditure of developer fees. i would like to put out to the board, who i am sure -- what is significant about that is less about the $2 million more,

but that it indicates to actually a very large degree that the construction and sort of economic life and soul of the city of san francisco is coming back. we're back to about what we were collecting when the economy began to tank in 2009. and in the heyday, i think we collected between $8-9 million. so i think the prognosis in terms of collections being up is a healthy one not just for the school district, but for the city at-large and for a point of reference, much of the monies that were spent last year were spent reconverting the horseman campus to continue to develop the former bryant campus for international high school. to redo the isa campus and to

finish building the brand-new tech 21 career building at the john o'connell campus. so there is a lot of really exciting projects that this work has funded and next year we have a number of similar projects targeted including trying to replace the final remaining modular what's buildings that we are renting with permanent classroom buildings. so with that, i would ask if there have any questions that you might have and hopefully you will approve the report. thank you. >> thank you; there are no public speakers for this item. any comments from the board or superintendents? >> no, but i read it. >> it's right here. >> i move the recommendations. >> we already did. roll call, please. >> have i one question? >> commissioner? >> thank you president yee.

this report is annual or every five years? >> it's annual. >> it's actually both. it's done every year and what the government code says is that would like for developers in the city of san francisco to sort of having a non-binding five-year projection each year of what we're spending the money on, so theoretically we're not putting it in a box somewhere. we're not bound by those, but we try to give a listing of work reflect what can be spent on. >> has this group done this every year? >> they have done this report for us every year for the last, i think, four or five years. and one of the other things, by the way, i might add that they

are doing for us now is that sacramento has determined that school districts are allowed this year to raise their developer fee amounts that we charge developers. however, the only way we can do that is we need to demonstrate under the government code certain specific demographic and other sort of financial and economic conditions in the city of san francisco have changed to warrant that increase. so we have actually retained them to see if we are entitled to raise our rates, which would obviously help us and we won't know that for several years. >> so this is a company that we subcontract with? >> yes. >> what is the amount for the work of this company? >> i think this work is $18 ,000 and the study is $25,000 on top of that, but that would

only happen at times that we're looking to raise our rates and we have not raised our rates, since, i believe, 2005. >> roll call miss ly? >> yes. >> miss fewer? >> yes. >> miss maufas? >> yes. >> thank you miss mendoza? >> yes. >> dr. maufas? >> aye. >> miss norton? >> yes. >> miss wynns? >> aye. >> president yee? >> aye. >> seven aye. item m discussion of other educational issues. none. item n, consent calendars resolutions. item o, vote on consent calendar moved and seconded under section f. roll call, please. >> thank you. miss ly? >> yes. >> miss fewer? >> yes.

>> miss maufas? >> i am taking the roll call on the consent calendar. >> miss mendoza? >> yes, except for k4. >> you are voting what on k4? >> i abstain. >> miss mendoza? >> yes except on k3, 5 and 6 or actually 5 got pulled. on 3 and 6, because they are retroactive. >> thank you. dr. murase? >> yes, point of information, so the personnel item was

receive sered severed, correct? >> yes. >> the first item is f9 severed correct? okay, f13. i think commissioner maufas,

you severed that? >> i did. we received courtesy of uesf president. are we in the midst of litigation and should we be discussing this item at all? >> the particular facts surrounding this item is a procedural matter based upon a submission of a resignation and then how that was addressed by our hr department. and what follow on things occurred. this can be discussed in open session. >> thank you, i appreciate that guidance. >> can we talk about -- are

we indicating that miss olsen should continue with her resignation? what is our position? i know we changed the date. i heard that correction earlier from the superintendent's office. >> i will go through the timeline. president kelly indicated that she rescinded in one day, one day after she submitted her resignation. on the first of november, the individual emailed the principal at her school informing her she was going to resign and when would be the best time to do that? i have an attachment that supports that, should you want to see that. on the 6th of november, the individual teacher submitted her resignation effective november 16th. that was the 5th of november.

>> it was on the 5th she submitted? >> the 5th of november she submitted her resignation and effective date on that submission and i have that, if you would like to see it, effective november 16th. on the 6th of november, the principal submitted the resignation to human resources through interoffice mail. on the 7th of november the resignation was entered into people's soft by human resources. on the 8th of november, hr, we in hr posted the position opening dated for 11/7/2012. on the 8th of november also an

applicant, one of our teachers contacted the principal interested in the position. correction on the 9th of november. on the 13th of november, the teacher -- the subject teacher, the resignee stated that november 30th would be her last day and have i that attachment. on the 13th of november, the applicant interviewed with the principal of the school. on the 13th of november, the

teacher in question submitted a second resignation, changing the effective date to 11/30. requesting that we change the date to 11/30. to november 30th from the 16th, which is why we changed that so we didn't have to do this twice. on the 14th of november, the teacher in question emailed the principal and asked if it was possible to be reinstated and i can quote what she said and i have that attachment. on the 16th of november, i think i will just paraphrase --

>> is in the principal's response on the 16th? >> on the 16th the teacher in question emailed to the principal and said i never received a response, but i did want to let you know that i am talking with the union and they may be contacting you. also a parent told me today there were some parents who complained about my teaching with you. i wasn't aware of this and can i meet you with and there is another attachment. the principal went back to the teacher and said i am not sure about rescinding your resignation and your labor representative would be the best to advise you in this situation. >> that is also on the 16th? >> that was on the 20th.